By Emelie Rutherford
Pentagon officials are studying how President Barack Obama’s proposal to cancel NASA’s Constellation spaceflight program would impact the military’s solid-rocket-motor efforts.
The White House’s fiscal year 2011 NASA budget request calls for eliminating Constellation, a space-shuttle-replacement effort intended to return astronauts to the moon that has included the developmental Ares I launch vehicle and Orion capsule and future Ares V heavy-lift rocket. The administration instead wants to help commercial companies develop human-spaceflight vehicles and to pursue new technology-development programs.
Gary Payton, deputy undersecretary of the Air Force for space, met this month with NASA officials to understand “their immediate and longer term future for the cancellation of Constellation…so that we can learn what the ramifications and the ripple effect could be,” he told the Senate Armed Services Strategic Forces subcommittee March 10.
“That’s a relationship we intend to manage and understand very closely,” he said when quizzed by Sen. David Vitter (R-La.), the ranking member of the Strategic Forces panel.
Gen. Robert Kehler, head of Air Force Space Command, said the “most immediate challenge” facing his service regarding the proposed Constellation cancellation relates to how the loss of the program would leave the solid-rocket-motor industrial base and thus impact Pentagon costs.
While the largest demand today in that industry comes from NASA, the Pentagon also relies on it for launch vehicles such as the Air Force’s Evolved Expendable Launch Vehicle (EELV). The EELV government-space-launch system is made up of Delta IV and Atlas V rockets developed by Lockheed Martin [LMT]-Boeing [BA] joint venture United Launch Alliance.
“Part of the review that’s now going on that Mr. Payton is heading, is in fact drilling down into that area of concern that we have to find out whether that’s a real concern or whether it is not,” Kehler said.
Initial estimates show canceling Constellation could double the price of the EELV’s propulsion systems, both solid-propellant and liquid-propellant rocket engines, the general said.
He said changing the way the Air Force buys EELV could possibly save money.
“We’ve got a series of six (EELV-related) studies going on right now to look at how we can maintain the mission assurance, maintain the reliability, and reduce these costs that were seen on the horizon,” Payton said.
Sen. Bill Nelson (D-Fla.), chairman of the Strategic Forces subcommittee, and Vitter both expressed concerns about EELV costs.
“I don’t understand how it wouldn’t be a concern,” Vitter said about Pentagon costs rising if the solid-rocket-motor industry loses the NASA work.
Also on March 10, Air Force Secretary Michael Donley cited significant concerns with EELV prices when testifying before the House Appropriations Defense subcommittee (HAC- D).
“With the changes in NASA’s program, we face some significant challenges in developing an affordable funding profile for space-launch support (with EELV),” he said. “So that’s an area that we’re looking at in particular right now.”
In addition to the NASA-related industrial-base concerns, Donley said the EELV effort has experienced “significant cost growth which we’re not happy with and we’re looking for alternatives going forward.” The Air Force benefited from multiyear contract arrangements that have since expired, he noted.
Payton, meanwhile, told the Senate panel he wants to ensure that if NASA pursues EELV in the future, which is a possibility, the space agency and the Pentagon do not pursue unique variants without commonality.
“If EELV does become part of NASA’s future, either through government flights or commercial flights, we would have to watch very closely any design changes, any production line changes, that sort of detail, work very closely with NASA to understand and make sure we both end up with a better product,” he said.
Kehler also noted ways the Pentagon could benefit from NASA’s new spaceflight plans, including its proposed research and development investment in a new liquid engine.
That “is a good opportunity that we think we would very much like to collaborate with them (on),” he said.
The general also noted potential military benefits resulting from NASA’s desire to improve the launch infrastructure on the East Coast, and from its move to increase demand on commercial activities.
“We have said for a very long time that part of our assured access to space plan includes commercial launch vendors that are viable, and so this pulling on commercial we also think is a positive thing,” Kehler said.
For Constellation, ATK [ATK] has been the prime contractor for the Ares I first stage, Boeing has developed the Ares I upper stage, and Lockheed Martin has been making Orion.